Vote in Belarus Called Unfair

Balloting in the reelection of Belarussian President Alexander G. Lukashenko was unfair, European monitors concluded Monday, but they nonetheless called on the West to intensify relations with his nation.

“Isolation of the country is not in the interest of the Belarussian people, nor does it strengthen the democratic structures of the country,” argued Kimmo Kiljunen, a Finnish representative speaking for the monitors about Sunday’s controversial vote.

As police cleared a few hundred remaining anti-Lukashenko demonstrators from this capital’s main square Monday afternoon, the president told a gathering of elderly supporters and foreign journalists that the election was an “elegant victory.”

Lukashenko’s main rival, Vladimir Goncharik, called the results an “elegant forgery.”

Goncharik said that Lukashenko supporters had grossly exaggerated the president’s vote total and that he plans to appeal the results to the Central Election Commission and the courts.

At a news conference, Lukashenko showed not the least sign of embarrassment at the monitors’ conclusions and suggested it was time for them to leave the country.

He also reminded Europeans that Russian gas and oil flow to them through Belarus, saying it is in their interest to maintain good relations. “Both we and you will benefit,” he said.

Lukashenko said the Belarussian government will continue to make close ties to Russia its first foreign policy priority. He added, however, that he is willing to negotiate with the West “without preconditions.”

Since coming to power seven years ago in this nation that is half the size of California and squeezed between Russia and Poland, Lukashenko has been accused of rolling back the clock on democracy and trying to reintroduce a revamped Soviet-style authoritarian government.

As officially reported, voters returned the 47-year-old president to office with 75.6% of the ballots and gave Goncharik just 15.4%. The rest of the vote went to another candidate or a category labeled “against all candidates.”

“Unfortunately, the presidential elections did not meet the international standards of free and fair elections,” said Kiljunen, coordinator for the monitoring mission. “Maybe the election process was somewhat free, but clearly it was not fair.”

In a nuanced report, the international commission--made up of observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Council of Europe and the European Parliament--tried to find some positives in the electoral process. It cited an “emerging civil society” and “maturing . . . democratic awareness” on the part of the population.

At the same time, however, diplomats reported that independent political groups and people had been repeatedly blocked, abused and censored by the government.

Among the flaws observed, the report notes, were “a political regime that . . . does everything in its power to block the opposition,” an election administration that failed to be impartial, a campaign of intimidation against political activists, a “smear campaign” against the international observers and a highly biased state-controlled media.

The observers also said they were not able to do their job properly because the government kept them out of the country until three weeks before the vote, causing them to miss important early stages of the electoral process.

Nevertheless, the mission appeared to pull its punches somewhat, urging that no sanctions be applied to Belarus and stating that Lukashenko’s representatives would be welcome as observers at an upcoming European parliamentary event.

Monitors might have feared that a harsh recommendation could have brought retaliation against the opposition forces after the diplomats leave.

The statement said the monitors were “especially concerned about explicit threats made recently by highest government representations against the opposition and independent media and activists. Developments in this area will remain under special international scrutiny.”

At the news conference, Lukashenko warned that Belarussian journalists “are part of society and should act in conformity with laws that are in effect. I would stress that we will not let anyone insult the people and their [election] choice.”